Leela,if you are saying that it is the British version of S-55 and only the later models used turbine engine,then what's that inside the nose of that helo?...doesn't it look like an air intake of a turboshaft engine?...

Looking closely behind the thing,there is something like a radial engine...is that engine having its intake port designed like a turboshaft?....

Looking closely behind the thing,there is something like a radial engine...is that engine having its intake port designed like a turboshaft?

That would be a neat trick given radial engines don't have intakes like turboshafts because they work completely different.

While true, I seem to remember a short span of radial engines that had some kind of ringed air intake at the direct center, where the propeller would be. I saw photos of the engine used on a still unidentified fighter design, but it is still unclear to me what exactly the configuration was.

Looking closely behind the thing,there is something like a radial engine...is that engine having its intake port designed like a turboshaft?

That would be a neat trick given radial engines don't have intakes like turboshafts because they work completely different.

While true, I seem to remember a short span of radial engines that had some kind of ringed air intake at the direct center, where the propeller would be. I saw photos of the engine used on a still unidentified fighter design, but it is still unclear to me what exactly the configuration was.

Either you're talking about a standard turboprop engine, or you're referring to the dead attempts at ducted prop-spinners around the late 40's.

Regarding the latter, there were some that resembled intakes like a turbojet at the center of the propeller, while others were just small vents along the sides of the spinner. Most of the engines were in fact radial. It was an experiment to reduce drag by ducting the air to the engine.

It work great with some aircraft, others had cooling problems (ironically), but what really killed the idea was the fact it caused to much of a problem for engine maintenance. Not to mention it was expensive to produce.

Either you're talking about a standard turboprop engine, or you're referring to the dead attempts at ducted prop-spinners around the late 40's.

Regarding the latter, there were some that resembled intakes like a turbojet at the center of the propeller, while others were just small vents along the sides of the spinner. Most of the engines were in fact radial. It was an experiment to reduce drag by ducting the air to the engine.

It work great with some aircraft, others had cooling problems (ironically), but what really killed the idea was the fact it caused to much of a problem for engine maintenance. Not to mention it was expensive to produce.

You could be right. Now that I think about it that does make more sense. Thanks.

Looking closely behind the thing,there is something like a radial engine...is that engine having its intake port designed like a turboshaft?

That would be a neat trick given radial engines don't have intakes like turboshafts because they work completely different.

While true, I seem to remember a short span of radial engines that had some kind of ringed air intake at the direct center, where the propeller would be. I saw photos of the engine used on a still unidentified fighter design, but it is still unclear to me what exactly the configuration was.

Either you're talking about a standard turboprop engine, or you're referring to the dead attempts at ducted prop-spinners around the late 40's.

Regarding the latter, there were some that resembled intakes like a turbojet at the center of the propeller, while others were just small vents along the sides of the spinner. Most of the engines were in fact radial. It was an experiment to reduce drag by ducting the air to the engine.

It work great with some aircraft, others had cooling problems (ironically), but what really killed the idea was the fact it caused to much of a problem for engine maintenance. Not to mention it was expensive to produce.

Cool! I didn't even know about these. How many aircraft were tested with it?

Looking closely behind the thing,there is something like a radial engine...is that engine having its intake port designed like a turboshaft?

That would be a neat trick given radial engines don't have intakes like turboshafts because they work completely different.

While true, I seem to remember a short span of radial engines that had some kind of ringed air intake at the direct center, where the propeller would be. I saw photos of the engine used on a still unidentified fighter design, but it is still unclear to me what exactly the configuration was.

By the way I think SuperStallion solved your mystery fighter. Is it the Hawker Tempest V in his last post?